Regrinding Victorinox knife

[Jan]

Ken, I am sticking with your procedure because it's really good. 

Look below how many double-ended kenjigs I have prepared for future use.   

For very long protrusion settings (e.g. for cleavers) I use the modified the "Starrett square". 

Jan

[WolfY]

Jan,

I know we refer to each other as we write here, but I always remember that there are others active and inactive visitors.
so pls don't take it personally, I have no doubt about your ability, knowledge and rutins.
It's good that the others can see that there are many ways to do things with good result.
What I see in common with all our involvement, is that the knife jig is not centering the knife.
I have a draw for jig that will solve this problem. Just didn't find time to make a working prototype yet. Working on that a.s.a.p.

[Jan]

It is not a problem for me to communicate without mentioning the addressee. 

I usually name the recipient when responding to some unique question. I think it keeps the communication more lively surely not excluding inactive visitors. E.g. I am inactive in woodturning issues, but follow with interest all bilateral opinion exchange between the posting members.

I am looking forward to read about your self-centring knife jig. 

Jan

[Ken S]

Jan,

I like your double sides kenjig idea. I would have preferred my original name for it, the knife setting tool or KS-150, as it is more name neutral.

Clever adaptation of the Starrett square.

WolfY,

I, too, am looking forward to your new design.

Ken

[wootz]

If WolfY publishes his jig design online, he won't be able to patent it, let alone sell the idea to Tormek or whoever might be interested in manufacturing.

[Ken S]

Good point, Wootz.

I originally held back on the kenjig, thinking that Tormek might want to manufacture it. I detected no interest. I can certainly understand why any business, including Tormek, would prefer the protection of a company held patent on its product. Indeed, Tormek holds numerous patents.

I would ask, is an idea for a jig patentable? And, if the idea is patentable, is it profitable to do so?

Although I have chosen to openly share my ideas through the forum, I certainly understand why someone might wish to seek a profit from a good idea. If so, he has my blessing and encouragement.

My reason for hoping Tormek might want to include the kenjig in its product line was that it seemed the most efficient way to distribute the idea. Very few forum members seem to have included the concept in their sharpening. Jan is a notable and appreciated exception. I have long realized that the kenjig concept needs a you tube for wider acceptance. That is a skill I have not yet developed.

For anyone who wishes to privately develop an idea, do so with my encouragement. If it is available at a reasonable cost and seems to fit my needs, I will purchase one. I purchased one of Robin Bailey's extended universal supports. It lets me do a better job sharpening my Chinese cleaver.

I would like to be wrong, however, I do not believe there is substantial income to be made in third party jigs.

Ken

[WolfY]

If WolfY publishes his jig design online, he won't be able to patent it, let alone sell the idea to Tormek or whoever might be interested in manufacturing.

You nailed it

This idea I have I had for very long time and I jungled with it a lot. I think I have finally got it to function, on the paper at least.

The guy that is supposed to help me with the real prototype has been too busy but we are about to make an appointment soon and produce it. If it will work or maybe even before I'll apply for protection. It is good for me, for Tormek and I don't care about the rest . Remember, if I share it now others might see and produce it too. All have same problem. As for Tormek I'm not of concern.
As for protection= money? Yes it is also a consideration of course. Had many sleepless nights not to consider it

[WolfY]

Jan,

Remembering the no. of turns is good for the brain exercise especially when doing mechanical/ casual work And there is always a paper sheet to use if necessary. It's also a good idea to write a small notation that only you understand and glue it to the Tormek. E.g 40mm/40dgr - 2 turns. Etc...
I don't pay attention to the value of 1 turn as it would be too much science in it. Although it is good to know the value of it.
Problem is when attaching the knife is to be concistant. Do you align the knife face to the jig or try to center it? How wide is the knife? Etc...
This differences can move the center of the edge and differ how much to compensate. So I either measure with the WM-200 both sides (only 1 time) to know how much to turn the jig or I just use my feeling. 1 dgr or so is accepted as difference of edge angles. If difference is too big you see it direct on the bevel.

I have to add a notice to this statement above.

How much changing the protrusion with the handle, and if to shorten or prolong the ttl length, depends of course on how the knife is centered or not and the thickness of the knife as well as the bevel angle. Still I think' we are at most difference within 3 dgrs.

[Jan]

3 degrees difference in bevel angle is just the size when the asymmetry in bevel width starts to be visible for a trained eye because than the bevel on one side may be by almost 50% wider than on the other side.   

Jan